House of Lords: Peers' Reimbursement Allowance Scheme

Lord Jenkin of Roding: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	What are the new limits for the subsistence and secretarial elements of the Peers' reimbursement allowance scheme from 1 August 2003.

Lord Brabazon of Tara: The resolution of the House of 20 July 1994 provided for the limits of the subsistence and secretarial allowances to be uprated annually on 1 August in line with the increase in the retail prices index over the previous 12 months to July.
	Accordingly, the limits within which Lords may be reimbursed expenses incurred were increased with effect from 1 August 2003 and are as follows:
	
		
			  £ 
			 Overnight subsistence 128.00 
			 Day subsistence 64.00 
			 Office costs 53.50 
			 Office costs for non-sitting periods 2,140 a year

Northern Ireland: ECJ Cases

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will consider intervening in any cases in the European Court of Justice involving Article 4 of Directive 2000/78/EC after 2 December 2000; and whether they accept the principle of increasing sectarian control as an exemption to the principles of equality and fairness.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: I understand the noble Lord has discussed the terms of this Question with officials in the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister.
	I understand the noble Lord has received a satisfactory explanation to his Question.

Northern Ireland: Paediatric Renal Isotope Scans

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 25 June (WA 21) concerning waiting lists in Northern Ireland since 1 January, whether all possible facilities for paediatric renal isotope scans have been in use; and, if not, why.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The paediatric renal isotope scanning facilities at the Royal Belfast Hospital for Sick Children have not been in use due to prioritisation of resources at the hospital. However, arrangements have been in place to provide children with the renal isotope scanning service at the Royal Victoria Hospital. Additional funding has now been made available to allow the operation of all facilities.

Peace II Funding

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 17 June (WA 88) concerning Peace II implementing bodies, which are the 47 bodies; on what basis they are selected; and by whom.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Within Northern Ireland, the 47 Peace II Implementing Bodies are made up of: the Special EU Programmes Body; 8 government departments; 12 intermediary funding bodies; and 26 local strategy partnerships. A full list of the 47 implementing bodies in Northern Ireland is attached below.
	In accordance with the horizontal principles written into the Peace II Operational Programme the implementing bodies selected were those which are best placed to deliver the objectives of the programme by virtue of their scale, expertise or the nature of their activities.
	The role of the Special EU Programmes Body and government departments as implementing bodies was established through a consultative process with local partners in the development of the programme. The 12 intermediary funding bodies (IFBs) were selected by an open competitive tendering process. Local strategy partnerships are situated in each of the 26 district council areas and each partnership was subject to local agreement between the four social partners, local government and the main statutory agencies operating at the local level. List of the 47 Implementing Bodies in Northern Ireland 1. The Special EU Programmes Body Government Departments (8) 2. Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) 3. Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) 4. Department of Social Development (DSD) 5. Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment (DETI) 6. Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety (DHSSPS) 7. Department of Education (DE) 8. Office of the First Minister/Deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) 9. Department of Employment and Learning (DEL) Intermediary Funding Bodies (12) 10. Northern Ireland and Pre-school Playgroups Association (NIPPA) 11. Northern Ireland Voluntary Trust (now—Community Foundation for Northern Ireland (CFNI)) 12. Southern Education and Library Board (SELB) 13. Training for Women Network (TWN) 14. PROTEUS 15. Playboard 16. Education Guidance Service for Adults 17. Rural Development Council (RDC) 18. Community Relations Council (CRC) 19. Co-operation Ireland 20. Combat Poverty Agency (CPA) 21. Area Development Management (ADM) Local Strategy Partnerships (26) 22. Antrim Local Strategy Partnership 23. Ards Local Strategy Partnership 24. Armagh Local Strategy Partnership 25. Ballymena Local Strategy Partnership 26. Ballymoney Local Strategy Partnership 27. Banbridge Local Strategy Partnership 28. Belfast Local Strategy Partnership 29. Carrickfergus Local Strategy Partnership 30. Castlereagh Local Strategy Partnership 31. Coleraine Local Strategy Partnership 32. Cookstown Local Strategy Partnership 33. Craigavon Local Strategy Partnership 34. Derry Local Strategy Partnership 35. Down Local Strategy Partnership 36. Fermanagh Local Strategy Partnership 37. Larne Local Strategy Partnership 38. Limavady Local Strategy Partnership 39. Lisburn Local Strategy Partnership 40. Magherafelt Local Strategy Partnership 41. Moyle Local Strategy Partnership 42. Newry & Mourne Local Strategy Partnership 43. Newtownabbey Local Strategy Partnership 44. North Down Local Strategy Partnership 45. Omagh Local Strategy Partnership 46. South Tyrone Local Strategy Partnership 47. Strabane Local Strategy Partnership

North/South Language Body

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 11 June (WA 44) concerning the North/South Language Body, whether the "Financial Memorandum" referred to applies in the Irish Republic.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Yes.

Cross-Border Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answers by the Lord Privy Seal on 3 June (WA 138–39) and the Lord President on 30 June (WA 52) concerning proportionality of funding for 2003, whether the procedure followed was that set out on 5 December 2002 and entitled Ministerial Decision-Making Interim Procedures; and whether it was consistent with the letter from the Northern Ireland Secretary of State to David Trimble MP of 19 December 2002 and with the Written Answer of the Lord Privy Seal on 14 January (WA 28); and, if so, on what date were the working party meeting and the consultations on the cross-community basis and with the Ulster Scots Agency.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The procedure followed for decisions taken in relation to the budgets for the North/South implementation bodies as set out in my Answer of 16 June 2003 (WA 77) was consistent with the letter from the Northern Ireland Secretary of State to David Trimble MP and with my Answer of 14 January 2003 (WA 28). Papers relating to the budgets for the North/South implementation bodies were forwarded to the special advisers in the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister on 6 February 2003.
	Implementation of the interim procedures is an administrative matter for officials in the relevant departments and on this occasion there was no working party meeting or consultation with the agency.

Ulster-Scots Agency

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 7 July (WA 6) concerning the Ulster-Scots Agency, whether they can confirm that no action was taken by the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure concerning movement of funds from one financial year to the next as a result of the minutes of 2 November 2001 of the Ulster-Scots Agency.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: I refer the noble Lord to the answer given on 7 July 2003 (WA 6), which describes the action taken by the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure on 25 October 2001 and 11 February 2002.

Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will make available on a website and in the Library of the House the minutes of the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Implementation Body.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission (FCILC) has advised that restricted versions of the minutes of board meetings, excluding staffing or other confidential issues, will be provided regularly on the Loughs Agency's website (www.loughs-agency.org). This will commence with the minutes of the 17th meeting of the FCILC board (held on 21 May) which will be made available before the end of July 2003.

Cross-Border Implementation Bodies: Provision of Cars for Chief Executives

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why it was considered necessary to provide cars for two of the chief executives of Cross-Border implementation bodies and not the other chief executives.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The provision of a leased car was part of the remuneration package agreed with the prospective chief executive of the Special European Union Programmes Body (SEUPB) before his appointment to the post.
	The board of the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission (FCILC) approved the purchase of a vehicle for the use of the chief executive of the Loughs Agency. The chairman of the board of the FCILC has advised that the board considers the use of the vehicle by the chief executive to be appropriate and cost-effective.
	The other chief executives of North/South implementation bodies are compensated for the travelling and other expenses they occur in performing their official duties.

Belfast Education and Library Board: DVD Language Policy

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 8 July (WA 24) concerning a DVD entitled "Rhyming Round Belfast", whether a business case was presented to the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure for the DVD's funding; if so, for how much; and how long it took to process.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Belfast Education and Library Board was not required to submit a business case to the department for the funding of this project.

Lough Neagh: Water Quality

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are satisfied with the water quality in Lough Neagh; and what steps are being taken to improve it.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: On the basis of monitoring information gathered by a number of government departments since the 1960s, I am satisfied that water quality in Lough Neagh is being maintained at a sufficiently high quality for use as a potable water supply, to sustain a commercial fish population, and to support a range of recreational activities. However, specific water quality problems, mainly related to enrichment by plant nutrients from agricultural and urban sources within the catchment area of the lough, have been identified. These probems have led to a number of cross-departmental actions aimed at preventing further deterioration and achieving improvements in water quality, where possible. A nutrient control strategy, designed to co-ordinate activities in this area, will be issued by the Department of the Environment's Environment and Heritage Service by the end of this year.

Northern Ireland Civil Service: Equality Officers

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 11 June (WA 41), whether the 110 officials in the Northern Ireland Civil Service involved in promoting equality practice promote equality of opportunity or equality of outcome.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The 110 officials referred to, like every Northern Ireland civil servant, are subject to and carry out the duty placed on public authorities by Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, to "have due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity" between persons of different religious belief, political opinion, racial group, age, marital status or sexual orientation; between men and women generally; between persons with a disability and persons without; and between persons with dependants and persons without.

Immigration: Identity Fraud

Lord Orme: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they plan to introduce any measures to prevent identity or document fraud in the immigration field.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Government are committed to maintaining effective immigration control while at the same time ensuring that genuine passengers are able to pass through our ports with the least possible inconvenience.
	An essential part of our effort to maintain effective immigration control is to prevent passengers entering or remaining in the United Kingdom using forged documents. We have therefore been working with our EU colleagues on a new secure vignette to be used when people are granted permission to remain in this country. The new vignette, which will be placed in the holder's passport, follows a common EU-wide format allowing easy identification across the whole EU. This does not alter the conditions on which a person may enter the UK, or allow those people granted permission to remain in other EU countries to come to the UK. The vignette is solely a uniform and secure way of granting people permission to remain within each member state of the EU.
	The new common format permit will be introduced in the UK from mid-September 2003.
	In parallel with this initiative we are introducing changes to the Immigration Rules which will require non-EEA nationals who wish to come to the UK for more than six months to obtain an entry clearance before travelling here. The entry clearance will be obtained from a British diplomatic mission overseas. This change reflects the need to manage the flow of passengers through UK ports effectively and at the same time to provide a first class service to travellers. By introducing this change we intend to streamline the service provided to people who are coming to the UK. For people who are coming to this country for more than six months we do not believe that applying for entry clearance in advance of travel will prove an unreasonable burden. This approach will provide the best service to passengers and allows for the most efficient use of our resources.
	It is our intention that the new entry clearance arrangements will be introduced in stages over a two-year period. The first stage will involve introducing this requirement for nationals of 10 countries and will come into force from 13 November 2003. We will be publicising this change in advance but recognise that there may be some passengers who are not aware of this change. There will therefore be transition arrangements to ensure that genuine passengers are not unduly inconvenienced. A "grace period" will operate until 23.59 p.m. on 13 January 2004, during which any passenger who arrives at a UK port, and would qualify for entry except for the absence of the necessary entry clearance, will be admitted.

Diplomatic Missions and International Organisations: Offences Committed by Staff

Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many serious offences were allegedly committed in 2002 by persons entitled to immunity by virtue of their employment by a diplomatic mission or an international organisation, and by their dependants.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: From a community of around 20,000 in the United Kingdom entitled to immunity, 20 serious offences, allegedly committed by such persons, were drawn to the attention of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in 2002. "Serious Offences" are defined in accordance with the 1985 White Paper on Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges—that is as offences that would in certain circumstances, carry a penalty of 12 months or more imprisonment.

Diplomatic Missions and International Organisations: Offences Committed by Staff

Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish figures recording the number of outstanding parking and other minor traffic violation fines incurred by diplomatic missions during the year ending 31 December 2002.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The figures recorded for the number of outstanding parking and other minor traffic violation fines incurred by diplomatic missions and international organisations in the United Kingdom during the year 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2002 totalled 4,302 (£173,180.00). In April this year the Foreign and Commonwealth Office wrote to all affected diplomatic missions and international organisations giving them the opportunity to either pay their outstanding fines or appeal against them if they considered that the fines had been issued incorrectly. As a result payments totalling £52,200.00 were received, leaving a total of 3,021 (£120,980.00) unpaid fines for 2002. The following table details those diplomatic missions and international organisations that have 11 or more undisputed fines unpaid.
	
		
			 Diplomatic mission/international organisation No. of fines outstanding Amount in £ 
			 United Arab Emirates 323 12,830.00 
			 Libya 226 8,940.00 
			 China 195 7,790.00 
			 Egypt 97 3,790.00 
			 France 81 3,290.00 
			 Algeria 80 3,020.00 
			 Ghana 72 2,870.00 
			 Morocco 71 2,970.00 
			 Ukraine 71 2,840.00 
			 Oman 69 2,710.00 
			 Russia 67 2,670.00 
			 Greece 59 2,350.00 
			 Turkey 59 2,480.00 
			 Iran 56 2,190.00 
			 Uganda 52 2,100.00 
			 Senegal 51 2,040.00 
			 Yemen 50 1,970.00 
			 Hungary 48 1,960.00 
			 Philippines 44 1,760.00 
			 Pakistan 42 1,690.00 
			 Afghanistan 38 1,520.00 
			 Mozambique 38 1,520.00 
			 Vietnam 38 1,520.00 
			 Mongolia 37 1,470.00 
			 Kazakhstan 37 1,440.00 
			 Tunisia 36 1,440.00 
			 Qatar 34 1,170.00 
			 Jordan 31 1,280.00 
			 Sudan 31 1,220.00 
			 Zambia 31 1,210.00 
			 Ethiopia 30 1,180.00 
			 Kenya 30 1,200.00 
			 Cyprus 28 1,140.00 
			 Malaysia 26 1,040.00 
			 Poland 25 1,000.00 
			 United States of America 23 920.00 
			 Georgia 23 930.00 
			 Romania 21 880.00 
			 Brazil 20 790.00 
			 Commonwealth Secretariat 19 780.00 
			 Cote D'Ivoire 19 770.00 
			 Azerbaijan 18 740.00 
			 Indonesia 18 720.00 
			 Panama 18 740.00 
			 Lithuania 17 660.00 
			 Uzbekistan 17 670.00 
			 Finland 16 680.00 
			 Japan 16 640.00 
			 Bahrain 15 610.00 
			 Belgium 14 580.00 
			 Peru 13 520.00 
			 Bangladesh 13 520.00 
			 Nepal 13 520.00 
			 Nicaragua 13 520.00 
			 Thailand 13 520.00 
			 Albania 12 480.00 
			 Latvia 12 470.00 
			 Kuwait 11 500.00 
			 Germany 11 480.00 
			 South Africa 11 430.00 
			  
			 Total 2,698 107,680.00

India: Welfare of Women

Baroness Cox: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will make representations to the Indian Government to take action to enforce the laws against both the dowry system and sex-determination tests, and to launch a public education campaign to raise the status of women.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The practices of making dowry payments and of sex-determination testing are both outlawed under Indian law. But dowry payments continue to be a widespread problem across India, particularly in rural areas, and sex-determination tests continue to be misused, resulting in the termination of a disproportionate number of pregnancies of female foetuses.
	Both the Department for International Development and the British Council are involved in project work in India, some of it funded by the FCO's Human Rights Project Fund, targeted at promoting the empowerment and welfare of Indian women at most risk. Through this work we hope to raise awareness of the issues around women's rights—including dowry payments and female foeticide. Our High Commission in New Delhi also regularly raise human rights issues with the Government of India.

Age Discrimination

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider that the victims of age discrimination in the fields of education, housing, the provision of goods, facilities and services to the public, and public sector provision, should be given equal legal protection to that enjoyed by the victims of sex and race discrimination; and, if not, why not.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Unfair age discrimination is intolerable wherever it occurs. The Government's priority is to introduce effective and workable legislation outlawing age discrimination in employment and vocational training. That in itself requires the resolution of a number of complex and sensitive issues, which are discussed in our consultation—Equality and Diversity: Age Matters—launched on 2 July. We shall be following it up with a further consultation in 2004 on the draft legislation itself.
	In responding to our previous consultation—Towards Equality and Diversity—Age Concern England, the Third Age Employment Network, and the Association of Retired Persons Over 50 felt that legislation should be extended to goods and services.
	The Government believe that legislating against age discrimination at work will help to form less ageist attitudes generally. Demographic and economic factors will also provide powerful incentives for providers of goods and services to change discriminatory attitudes and eliminate discriminatory practices.

National Radiological Protection Board

Baroness Finlay of Llandaff: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How the expertise of the National Radiological Protection Board, its independence and United Kingdom-wide remit, will be preserved under the Health Protection Agency.

Lord Warner: The Health Protection Agency was established as a special health authority on 1 April this year and works in partnership with the National Radiological Protection Board.
	As announced in November 2002, we intend to introduce legislation to establish the agency as a non-departmental public body as soon as parliamentary time allows. We intend that the non-departmental public body will take responsibility for the National Health Service Act functions currently discharged by the special health authority (which will be wound up) and for the other functions identified in the consultation paper Health Protection: A consultation document on creating a health protection agency (June 2002). These include advice to the United Kingdom Government, the National Assembly for Wales and (should they so wish) the Northern Ireland authorities on radiation protection. Detailed arrangements for the non-departmental public body will be set out in the legislation.
	The Scottish Executive has conducted a separate consultation exercise on future arrangements for health protection in Scotland. Decisions in the light of this, including any implications they have for the functions to be given to the Health Protection Agency, will be announced in due course.

Food Supplements

Lord Beaumont of Whitley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What actions they are taking to ensure that maximum permitted levels of nutrients in supplements under the Food Supplements Regulations are set on the basis of safety, rather than nutritional need; and what help they intend to give manufacturers to enable them to prepare dossiers for the Food Safety Authority to facilitate the addition of nutrients to the list of permitted ingredients.

Lord Warner: The Government continue to argue for maximum permitted limits for vitamins and minerals in food supplements to be set on the basis of thorough risk assessments and will continue to press this view strongly at every opportunity.
	The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has succeeded in getting the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to hold a meeting between representatives of the United Kingdom food supplements industry, the relevant Scientific Panel in the EFSA and the European Commission to discuss dossier requirements. The meeting will take place on 14 October. Furthermore, officials at the FSA have already had discussions with industry representatives to aid interpretation of dossier requirements and have offered to comment on proposed dossiers before these are submitted to the EFSA.

Sexual Health: Government Response to Select Committee Report

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will publish their response to the Third Report of the House of Commons Select Committee on Health, on sexual health.

Lord Warner: The Government's response to the Third Report of the House of Commons Select Committee on Health, on sexual health, Cm 5959, has been published today. Copies have been placed in the Library.

Children: Performance Prospects and Economic Background

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will place in the Library of the House copies of the research papers on which were based the views about the different performance prospects of poor and rich children in the Guardian on 22 January, which were said to be related to remarks by a Minister in the Department for Education and Skills.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: The research is described on pages 22–23 of the 2003 DfES publication Education and Skills: The Economic Benefit. The original research is by Leon Feinstein called Inequality in the Early Cognitive Development of British Children in the 1970 Cohort published in the journal Economica (2003), 70, p73–97. I am placing copies of the DfES publication in the House of Lords Library as requested.

Science Teaching: Fieldwork

Baroness Walmsley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are reviewing the science GCSE and A-level curricula to consider the current provision for fieldwork; and
	What assessment they have made of the resource implications for all secondary schools of providing science and biology fieldwork for pupils; and
	Whether they had considered the document Teaching Biology Outside the Classroom: is it heading for extinction?, published by the Field Studies Council and the British Ecological Society; and
	What assessment they have made of the implications for enviromental awareness of the reduction in the number of school pupils who have access to fieldwork as part of the science and biology curriculum; and
	What information they collect centrally regarding the number of secondary schools which do not provide science and biology fieldwork opportunities for all pupils; and what are their strategies for encouraging the provision of such opportunities.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: There are no plans to review the provision for fieldwork within science GCSE or A-level. The existing science national curriculum at key stages 1 to 4, together with current GCSE and A-level syllabuses, encourages fieldwork. There is also a pilot at A-level which places particular emphasis on it. Additionally, all primary and secondary schools are required to make provision for fieldwork for all pupils as part of the geography curriculum. The department has considered the document Teaching Biology Outside the Classroom: is it heading for extinction? published by the Field Studies Council and the British Ecological Society. No assessment has been made of the implications for environmental awareness through pupils' access to fieldwork as part of the science and biology curriculum. The department does not collect information centrally about the provision of science or biology fieldwork opportunities for pupils. Growing Schools encourages schools to use the "outdoor classroom" as a resource in all subjects including science. The chief executive of the Field Studies Council and a representative of the National Association of Field Studies Officers are members of the Growing Schools National Advisory Group.

Mini Roundabouts: "Filter in Turn" Signs

Lord Donaldson of Lymington: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have any evidence to show that the display of "Filter in Turn" signs at mini roundabouts contributes to a reduction in road rage; and, if so, whether they will encourage highway authorities to display such signs.

Lord Davies of Oldham: We have no evidence to suggest that road safety would be improved if drivers were required to filter in turn rather than give way to traffic from the right at mini roundabouts. However, we have commissioned research to produce guidance aimed at ensuring that mini roundabouts are designed so that they will be used appropriately and safely.

Speed Limit Signs

Lord Donaldson of Lymington: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in light of the need for drivers to concentrate on the carriageway ahead rather than on its verges, they will encourage highway authorities to place reminders of speed limitations on the carriageway itself.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Local highway authorities already have powers to place carriageway speed limit roundels on their roads. However, carriageway roundels must be placed adjacent to upright speed limit signs as their visibility can be obscured by snow or other adverse weather conditions.

Heathrow Airport: Third Runway

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What assessment they have made of the health implications of constructing a third runway at Heathrow.

Lord Davies of Oldham: All of the runway options consulted on, including a possible third runway at Heathrow, have been assessed across a wide range of impacts, including in particular noise and local air quality, in accordance with the appraisal framework previously agreed and published. The details were set out in the consultation documents and supporting papers. Wider health implications of airport development are also being taken into account, consistent with Department of Health guidelines for health impact assessment.

Heathrow Airport: Third Runway

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How they plan to complete an assessment of how European Union limits on nitrogen dioxide will be achieved in the event that the proposal for a third runway at Heathrow Airport is approved before the publication of the aviation White Paper.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The EU limit values for nitrogen dioxide are not source specific: aviation is one of several sources that has to be considered for compliance purposes. The Government have undertaken an assessment of air quality impacts associated with Heathrow options in the consultation document The Future Development of Air Transport in the United Kingdom: South East. That document states "Another runway at Heathrow could not be considered unless the Government could be confident that levels of all relevant pollutants could be consistently contained within EU limits". Subsequent consideration of options and consultation response evidence for Heathrow and other airports is being undertaken in full knowledge of the UK environmental commitments.

Heathrow Airport: Third Runway

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they plan to complete an assessment on how to reduce traffic congestion around Heathrow Airport, if the proposal for a third runway is approved before the publication of the aviation White Paper.

Lord Davies of Oldham: For all the development options in The Future Development of Air Transport in the United Kingdom: South East consultation, the impacts on the strategic road and rail networks were appraised. The consultation indicated, for each option, where enhancements to the networks might be needed to cater for the increased number of passengers and employees accessing the airports. We are considering responses to the consultation.
	For any option which is supported by Government in the air transport White Paper, it will be for the developer to submit a full and detailed planning application supported by a robust surface access strategy.

Heathrow Airport: Air Quality

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How they plan to assess new studies of air quality in the Heathrow area which have emerged since the publication of the Future Development of Air Transport in the United Kingdom: South East consultation document.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Studies and research undertaken into air quality in the Heathrow area in support of responses to the consultation and separately are being rigorously assessed as part of the overall analysis. The Government are drawing upon expert advice in assessing this evidence.